People who are sure of S/N or T/F

[/DG/]

I have a theory... well it's not really my theory, as I'm sure others have thought of this before. It might even be common sense anyway... or it could be utter nonsense. I don't know, but I'd like your opinions.

It seems to me, that if...

someone is sure that they are an N, but unsure of T vs. F, they must either be Ni-dom or Ne-dom.
someone is sure that they are an S, but unsure of T vs. F, they must either be Si-dom or Se-dom.
someone is sure that they are an T, but unsure of S vs. N, they must either be Ti-dom or Te-dom.
someone is sure that they are an F, but unsure of S vs. N, they must either be Fi-dom or Fe-dom.

Which means that, for example, if someone is absolutely positive they are a thinker, but they can't decide whether or not they are INTJ or ISTJ, they are actually neither. This theory states that they must be either TiXe or TeXi. They cannot be INTJ or ISTJ because the dominant functions are Ni and Si. How can one be more sure of their auxiliary function than their dominant function?

 

[garbage]

I've had a "weaker" version of this thought, too--that if someone's more sure that they're an N than they are that they're an F, then they're probably intuition-dominant. There are certainly arguments against it, though.

Once I read into the theory, all of the types that I'd seriously considered for myself for any length of time have been intuition-dominant, and part of that was because of this line of reasoning.

 

[Thalassa]

Yeah, I think it's why - pending on what test I take - I've gotten ENFP...but also ENTP wacko...yet that still makes sense because I'm an Ne dom, and I am aware of my Te usage which really could sway my T/F...same for other strange tests which said things like "you're either INFJ or INTJ" (even more ) ...but then again, the only thing I've ever been 100% sure of is that I'm a Feeler, ironically enough, because I'm around 30 years of age and when I was much younger I was such a Feeler that the idea of me being a Thinker is just HAHAHAHAHAH.

Function theory really makes it all much more clear. I am an Ne dom. I have Fi. I score T or J sometimes because of my relatively strong leaning on my tertiary Te.

Function theory makes everything all better. It makes the most sense to just read Jung, have discussions with others, perhaps compare this with other test results...and then you have a clear picture. I am Ne/Fi/Te/Si.

 

[/DG/]

Yeah, I think it's why - pending on what test I take - I've gotten ENFP...but also ENTP wacko...yet that still makes sense because I'm an Ne dom, and I am aware of my Te usage which really could sway my T/F...same for other strange tests which said things like "you're either INFJ or INTJ" (even more ) ...but then again, the only thing I've ever been 100% sure of is that I'm a Feeler, ironically enough, because I'm around 30 years of age and when I was much younger I was such a Feeler that the idea of me being a Thinker is just HAHAHAHAHAH.

Function theory really makes it all much more clear. I am an Ne dom. I have Fi. I score T or J sometimes because of my relatively strong leaning on my tertiary Te.

Function theory makes everything all better. It makes the most sense to just read Jung, have discussions with others, perhaps compare this with other test results...and then you have a clear picture. I am Ne/Fi/Te/Si.

Wait wut? Doesn't this line contradict your post?

 

[raminda]

I have always been fairly sure I'm both T and N, but of these T is the one that has been questioned by others. Does that have any bearing in your theory?

 

[Thalassa]

Wait wut? Doesn't this line contradict your post?

The only thing I've ever been 100% sure of is being a Feeler, but on personality tests I have scored T sometimes, ENTP on at least three occasions. This is because of my Te development. I am not an NT, I am an NF. This much I know, I don't care what tests say, because quite frankly - as I have already emphasized - reading Jung and discussing personality theory with others is the only way.

I've been around 98% sure of being an N - fairly consistently, and I'm 110% sure now - but I did consider being ISFP for a minute while I was studying function theory, before I grasped it fully.

 

[/DG/]

I have always been fairly sure I'm both T and N, but of these T is the one that has been questioned by others. Does that have any bearing in your theory?

No, not really. People on the internet can't possibly know the real you. Do you feel that you S/N divide is much greater than your T/F divide? Vice versa? Is it relatively the same?

 

[Noon]

I'm not sure of anything, to be honest.

Except maybe Pi and introversion.

 

[/DG/]

The only thing I've ever been 100% sure of is being a Feeler, but on personality tests I have scored T sometimes, ENTP on at least three occasions. This is because of my Te development. I am not an NT, I am an NF. This much I know, I don't care what tests say, because quite frankly - as I have already emphasized - reading Jung and discussing personality theory with others is the only way.

I've been around 98% sure of being an N - fairly consistently, and I'm 110% sure now - but I did consider being ISFP for a minute while I was studying function theory, before I grasped it fully.

See, you're confusing with me. At first I thought you agreed with me... but if you say you've always been positive you are a feeler, yet you are an ENFP, it doesn't fit in with the theory. If you're using the theory in the OP, you should really be deciding between INFP and ENFJ. Meh...

*edit* Although your test results seem to be more in line with the theory. If you are, in fact, Ne-dominant, then your T/F dichotomy can be fuzzy at times.

 

[Thalassa]

No, not really. People on the internet can't possibly know the real you. Do you feel that you S/N divide is much greater than your T/F divide? Vice versa? Is it relatively the same?

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I will try to make it more clear for you. I think your theory probably isn't valid, but could work in some instances. This is because of function theory. The simple S/N and T/F is not enough to determine type. "Being sure you're an N" doesn't mean you actually are...BlackCat, for instance, was INFP for a significant amount of time, until he began to really grasp function theory, and realized he was an ISFP instead...he has Se/Ni, not Ne/Si.

I have Ne/Si...however, what has been consistently very clear to me is that I have the Fi/Te combination...I had to determine the actual difference between Ni/Ne and Si/Se to realize that there is no way I'm making the same mistake BlackCat did (because some ISFPs use a whole lot of Ni, which makes them think they're Ns sometimes).

I am an Ne dom. It actually can be very difficult for someone to "see" their dominant function because it is literally the lens through which you see the world.

That is why your theory could possibly fail in some instances.

So, in summary, I was pretty much thinking as I wrote - seeing how your theory could apply in some cases, but not in others.

 

[Lady_X]

i was only ever confused by e/i

 

[Thalassa]

See, you're confusing with me. At first I thought you agreed with me... but if you say you've always been positive you are a feeler, yet you are an ENFP, it doesn't fit in with the theory. If you're using the theory in the OP, you should really be deciding between INFP and ENFJ. Meh...

*edit* Although your test results seem to be more in line with the theory. If you are, in fact, Ne-dominant, then your T/F dichotomy can be fuzzy at times.

Yes perhaps my test results are more in line with your theory, and I am just internally more aware of my Feeler tendencies.

There's no way I could possibly be ENFJ...I knew from almost the very beginning that the thought of me being an Fe dom was LOLLERCOASTER.

 

[/DG/]

The simple S/N and T/F is not enough to determine type.

Oh no, not at all... but I think you can use it to eliminate certain possibilities. For example, I have always been positive of my S, but unsure of T vs. F. Therefore, I cannot be ISFP or ISTP, which I have thought I may have been at one point.

It actually can be very difficult for someone to "see" their dominant function because it is literally the lens through which you see the world.

Ahah! This is the kind of opposition I was hoping to see. It's great to have another opinion on the matter and I can definitely see how this could be true.

*edit* Not a fan of Fe, huh? Then I'd be more inclined to think you were an INFP than an ENFP. But I don't actually know you. You know you.

 

[INTP]

might be like that in some cases, but not in all. i dont think its like that most the times.

what matters most is that if the person has good understanding about self and MBTI. some people might know some parts of self more than others, so that Ne dom might be sure about T or F, but not about Ne vs Se because he doesent have full understanding of MBTI or whether he perceives details and then moves to big picture or or big picture first, then details.

 

[Thalassa]

Oh no, not at all... but I think you can use it to eliminate certain possibilities. For example, I have always been positive of my S, but unsure of T vs. F. Therefore, I cannot be ISFP or ISTP, which I have thought I may have been at one point.



Ahah! This is the kind of opposition I was hoping to see. It's great to have another opinion on the matter and I can definitely see how this could be true.

*edit* Not a fan of Fe, huh? Then I'd be more inclined to think you were an INFP than an ENFP. But I don't actually know you. You know you.

Well, another thing too, is that I've noticed that quite a few ExTPs have questioned whether they were ESTP or ENTP (which is respectively Se dom and Ne dom) ...so that conflicts with your theory.

You may just be very aware of having a Sensor preference. Other people (perhaps older people?) may be more balanced because of life experience and learning, leading to confusion that might need more clarification.

However, I think many problems in self-typing come from not understanding Jung. Seriously.

Now that I understand, I see how clearly I'm Ne/Fi/Te/Si...I only questioned it for so long because I wasn't grasping Jung, and was trying to mix it too much with MBTI (which I still like, to a degree, though it comes second to Jung) and Keirsey (which I think is the absolutely over-simplistic theory of fail for people who are too lazy to really try to grasp function theory, and would rather think in stereotypes, which is often what leads to people being jerks about judging Sensors and what-not).

 

[Xenon]

Makes sense in theory, but in practice I can think of a couple problems.

One is what Marm said: a lot of confusion over typing results not from being "close" on the S-N or T-F scale, but from poor understanding over what S, N, T and F preferences actually mean. The last letter I felt certain of was T, even though it's my dominant function. This is because I fit some common F stereotypes, like being neurotic and introspective and often conflict-averse. But once I gained a more solid understanding of what feeling as a judging/evaluative function really is, it became clear that I don't really make much use of it at all. Now I actually think I'm closer on the S-N scale than I am on the T-F scale.

Another is the different rates at which people develop their functions, due to environment or social pressure or whatever. Sometimes the inferior can be fairly strong in people.

 

[raminda]

No, not really. People on the internet can't possibly know the real you. Do you feel that you S/N divide is much greater than your T/F divide? Vice versa? Is it relatively the same?

Uh. How do I compare? I think I've been forced to develope more traits that come naturally to feelers than traits that come naturally to sensors, due to me growing up around loads of NFs and also due to me being a girl, but I don't think that has any bearing on my actual type or the "divides". I think I'm as much an N as I am a T.

 

[/DG/]

Uh. How do I compare? I think I've been forced to develope more traits that come naturally to feelers than traits that come naturally to sensors, due to me growing up around loads of NFs and also due to me being a girl, but I don't think that has any bearing on my actual type or the "divides". I think I'm as much an N as I am a T.

Well then the theory doesn't really apply to you.

Thanks for all of your responses, btw.

 

[strychnine]

It actually can be very difficult for someone to "see" their dominant function because it is literally the lens through which you see the world.

+1. I think this is very true. Ji especially is often totally invisible (or so I've heard). I can't see my dominant function (Fi, I'm ISFP) at all!

I'm sure of: Ji (probably Fi) Pe in some order. Perhaps I don't really get function theory. Or I am just balanced, probably not.

 

[Thalassa]

And lest I sound too judgemental about other theories, I would like to point something out:

In Keirsey, I could potentially be SOME SORT OF NF....INFP, INFJ, or ENFP, depending on who you ask, what time of day it is, what mood I'm in, and how inclined the person is to think in stereotypes (i.e. any feeler with strong opinions must be FJ!!!)

In MBTI, I could be INFP or ENFP, because on MBTI tests I consistently score so close to the middle on extroversion and introversion.

It is only through Jung that ALL OF THESE TEST RESULTS MAKE SENSE (including the weird ones like ENTP and INTJ) ...it is only there that I understand that I am Ne/Fi/Te/Si.

It is only then that I recognize that I could be testing borderline E/I on MBTI because of the nature of Ne dominance, and that I could be scoring T or J because of my usage of tertiary Te.

Otherwise, if people don't understand Jung (or themselves) they'll just be like: wow I have five different test results. What the fuck?

No bueno.